A Slovak company sought a VAT refund from Hungarian authorities based on Directive 2008/9. The tax authority of the first instance requested documents within 1 month, but the company did not respond, leading to dismissal of the proceedings. The company appealed, submitting the requested materials, but the authority did not accept it, stating that additional evidence could not be invoked at the 2nd instance stage.
The Advocate General’s opinion states that the one-month deadline is not strict and does not deprive the taxpayer of the opportunity to supplement the application at the court proceedings stage. Additionally, the taxpayer should have the right to present information or documents before the tax authority of the second instance, as long as the substantive conditions are met. Restricting this right on formal grounds when the substantive prerequisites are met is considered disproportionate and contrary to the principle of efficiency.
Source Pawel Mikula
See also
- Join the Linkedin Group on Global E-Invoicing/E-Reporting/SAF-T Developments, click HERE
Latest Posts in "European Union"
- Why Does the EU Lose Billions in VAT?
- Blog Part 4: The Cost Reality of ViDA: What CFOs Should Budget, Challenge and Avoid
- Amendments to EU Regulation: EPPO and OLAF Access to VAT Information for Combating Cross-Border Fraud
- CJEU Clarifies VAT Rules: Loyalty Points Are Not Vouchers Under EU Law
- ECJ C-167/26 – ECJ will review EGC Case T-689/24 RX – VAT deduction and invoice timing
